Deal or no deal? Southern African leaders proclaimed earlier this week that agreement had been reached to work towards a unity government in Zimbabwe. But Morgan Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change (MDC-T) quickly contradicted the announcement, saying the meeting's conclusions did not meet the party's expectations and that its national council will meet later in the week to decide whether to join the unity government or not.

Under the terms of Monday's "agreement", the home affairs ministry – which is coveted by the parties because it entails control of the police – will be shared. The MDC-T's demand for sole control is fair, because Robert Mugabe's Zanu-PF already controls the military. All the same, the MDC-T's post-talks statement signals the prospect of even more negotiations about power sharing in the midst of a worsening humanitarian crisis. The cholera epidemic has spread from urban to rural areas. The state has abdicated most of its responsibilities. Life is now unbearable under the prevailing economic conditions. Renewed talks will serve to compound Zimbabweans' doom and gloom. Zimbabwe continues to attract much international attention, but many have tired or are growing tired of the intransigent nature of the country's problems – particularly Zanu-PF's unwillingness to accommodate the MDC. Zanu-PF has done all it can to depict the MDC-T as the obdurate party in the talks. "If they (the MDC-T) think they can hold Zimbabwe to ransom it will be very unfortunate. I do not think the people of Zimbabwe will allow that to happen. They (the MDC-T) are pushing their luck," says Zimbabwe's deputy information minister Bright Matonga.

It is two months shy of a year since Mugabe and his party looked down and out after last year's disputed national elections. The sight of Mugabe as president – and holding the balance of power in the unity government – is certainly a marvel. It is emblematic of his party's ruthless instinct for survival. But it also shows how incapable the African Union (AU) and the Southern Africa Development Community are when it comes to dealing with incumbents who lose elections, only to deploy violence and fraud to remain in power. This is at the heart of the problem.

MDC-T finds itself bereft of viable options beyond the hostage politics that has ensued since the deal was first signed. The difficult question the party's national council faces in the coming days is whether to enter into an unequal and flawed agreement in order to work for incremental change within the state, or to stay outside it. Staying outside invites more Zanu-PF violence, and increased human suffering and misery for Zimbabweans under a Zanu-PF government isolated by western sanctions.

Joining the unity government as a junior partner would be a climbdown and an anti-climax for a party that seemed – at one point – to have relieved Zimbabwe from Zanu-PF's authoritarian grip. Many of the MDC-T's cadre and supporters will feel betrayed at the lack of justice after the violence meted out to them by Zanu-PF in the last election. Elections and democracy will seem more meaningless than ever. Nonetheless, the stark reality is that the key organs of state security remain aligned to Zanu-PF and Africans will not make Mugabe compromise further, even as Zimbabweans' suffering escalates. MDC-T will never enter the unity government on an equal or senior footing to Zanu-PF. Realism says the MDC-T is better off strategically working from within the government to bring about incremental change through constitutional reform, and by scrutinising and attempting to thwart ZANU PF's undemocratic machinations. Come the next election, the party will also find there are palpable advantages in having a foothold in the state.